Why Are Solar Panels So Inefficient?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the efficiency of solar panels, exploring the factors that contribute to their current performance levels, including band gap energy, the photoelectric effect, and economic viability. Participants also touch upon the implications of efficiency in different contexts, such as space applications versus terrestrial use.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the Earth absorbs a vast amount of solar energy annually, suggesting that harnessing a significant portion could power the planet for years.
  • Another participant explains that the band gap of a solar panel is directly related to the maximum voltage it can produce, indicating that changes to the band gap affect efficiency.
  • Some participants mention that companies like Spectrolab achieve higher efficiencies by using multiple semiconductor layers with different band gaps, although this technology is costly and primarily used in space applications.
  • There is a discussion about the importance of power output and lifetime over efficiency in practical engineering contexts, especially when panel area is not a limiting factor.
  • One participant highlights that not all light is converted into electricity due to energy losses, including those from band gap limitations and wiring configurations.
  • Another participant compares the efficiency of solar panels to that of internal combustion engines, noting that solar panels can achieve efficiencies above 40% in some cases.
  • Concerns are raised about the economic viability of solar energy as a sole energy source without advancements in energy storage solutions.
  • The discussion includes clarification that while efficiency is important, cost is a more critical factor in the context of global energy demand.
  • One participant points out that the basic process of the photoelectric effect leads to energy losses, particularly with photons that exceed the band gap energy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the efficiency and economic viability of solar panels, with no consensus reached on the best approach to improving efficiency or the implications of cost versus efficiency in different applications.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge various limitations affecting solar panel efficiency, including energy losses due to the photoelectric effect, wiring configurations, and the economic considerations surrounding solar technology.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to individuals studying electrical engineering, physics, renewable energy technologies, or those involved in the development and application of solar energy systems.

shoook
Messages
23
Reaction score
0
Hey guys, I am a complete beginner in the field of electrical engineering so please bare with me in this discussion.

It is my understanding that;
1) The Earth absorbs 3,850,000 exajoules in solar energy every year, which means that if we could harness even 50% of the suns power for just one day that it would be enough to power Earth for many many years.

2) Current photovoltaic panel technology captures and converts about 15% of the solar waves it receives.

3) The majority of this energy loss is due to band gap loss. The optimal band gap when balancing spectrum and voltage is about 1.4 eV.

So here's my question:
Why does less band gap result in lower voltage? Is there not some way to regulate or keep voltage constant while allowing the capture and conversion of a wider band of light?

Thanks for any help!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The band gap dictates the maximum voltage a solar panel can provide, they are inseparable. Thats why if you change the band gap you change the voltage. As to exactly why - you'd need to read up about semiconductors and PN junctions because I don't know off my head. Maybe someone else here does. The aim of a solar panel is not to provide the max voltage, but the max power P=IV.

If you made the band gap (voltage) too big then photons from the sun would not have enough energy to excite electrons and you'd lose efficiency. On the other hand, if you made the band gap too small, you'd get almost no power because of the tiny voltage.
 
Companies such as Spectrolab can make cells that are 40% and higher efficiency. They do this by layering different semiconductor materials which have different bandgaps. This allows them to use more of the solar spectrum. The cost so far is very high, which makes them only suitable for space applications: http://www.spectrolab.com/space.htm
 
This is an instance where 'efficiency' (in terms of energy out / energy in) may not be the most relevant factor, in engineering terms. There aren't many places (on Earth) where actual panelarea is a real limitation. What is often more important is the power output and lifetime (i.e. total energy produced) for a given cost.
 
Hey =).

If you want to make more efficient solar cells should you study physics or electrical engineering?
 
not all the light falling on a solar panel (photovoltaic cell) are turned into electronics, or are turned into electrons without enough energy to jump the bandgap.

But 25% or 40% is amazing efficiency, compare that with a motor car petrol engine that will top out at mabey 25%.

And if you want to make more efficient solar cells, study both physics AND engineering :)

There are also other things that limit the efficiency of PV's like if they are wired in series, you have kirchhoffs law, limiting the current through a series circuit to the current of the lowest source in that circuit.

So shading of some cells will drop the efficiency of large chunks of an array.

Also the regulation system to provide enough current to charge batteries (not a 100% efficient process), IR losses in wires, reflection of light. Cells in darkness or shaddow robbing power from the system.

There is some performance curve called a FILL FACTOR, that from memory is a ratio of open circuit voltage and short circuit current that is a determination of the 'goodness' of the cell.
 
Photovoltaic panels are EXTREMELY efficient. The best multijunction solar cells (2011) have energetic efficiencies over 40%. In comparison, a biological organism (i.e. photosynthesis of a plant) has an energetic efficiency of less that 1%.

That said, what you have to remember is that efficiency is meaningless on its own, since sunlight is "free". The only important factor is COST. Of course, efficiency affects the cost (~ inversely proportional). But efficiency is ONLY important in the cost calculation, nowhere else.
 
I should clarify, when I say only COST is important, I mean with respect to global energy demand, not with respect to specialist applications, such as space travel, where efficiency is much more important due to weight restrictions.
 
One of the limitations is that the basic process is the photoelectric effect; a visible light photon hits an electron in the silicon (valence band) and raises it up across the band gap into the conduction band. Although the band gap is 1.4 volts, a blue photon (4000 Angstroms) is 3 eV, so the rest of the photon energy (1.6 eV) is wasted as heat. Also, IR photons >8500 Angstroms don't have enough energy.

Bob S
 
  • #10
thopsy,

I assume you realize this thread has been dormant for almost four months?

Anyway, the biggest problem with solar is that it is not currently economically viable, and is not likely to ever be viable as the sole source of energy unless a means of economical energy storage emerges. But, it seems you already know that :-)

Fish
 
  • #11
Oops, I didn't realize that, sorry.

Actually, solar is the only ongoing source of energy on the Earth, (I guess you could count Nuclear potential as non-solar), so the question of cost is rather moot once we run out of fossil fuels.
 
  • #12
Eeek, people are going to be upset. I forgot that Tidal energy comes from gravitational forces, not from the sun. Sorry. But anyway the Tidal resource is rather limited.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
16K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
35
Views
6K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
11K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K